It is that time of year when I see a number of odd self-congratulatory pieces about not watching The Big Game.

Most people on the globe aren’t watching the Big Game.  It doesn’t really make you special.  Nor, really, is there that much pressure on the watching of the Big Game.

Mike Dice is leading an effort to get people not to watch the Big Game.  Instead, he wants everyone to read his reading list of Bilderburg Group books and watch Alex Jones films on the Internet.

I don’t think his effort is going to get too far.  Even people who want to read Bilderburg Group books and watch Alex Jones films on the internet would be doing so sometime or other.

I was not going to watch the Superbowl, until I learned that the league was going to mix things up a bit.  This year, they’re going to randomly shift around the teams, just to get it back to the Backyard Playground Basics of football.  So it will be a match-up between the Caints and the Solts.  My money was on the Caints — Peyton Manning plays for the Caints and he’s awesome — until I learned that this will be a “Skins” versus “Shirts” game, and that the Solts will be running around with all the protected uniform while the Caints won’t be wearing anything above their waist.  I expect the Caints to have a long list of injuries before the first quarter is up.

From comments section of a page I link below.
Isn’t LaRouche dead yet? — Posted by You Look Like I Need A Drink!
And yet.  Here I am again.  Indefatiguable.  Looking at the Pechenuks, the Howie Gs.  Sorting through the margin.  Searching for meaning where there just might be no meaning.

Item the First.  Some chaos in Illinois.  The Democratic Gubernatorial candidate finds himself with an unwelcome lieutenant gubernatorial candidate.

This, I think, is a serious flaw in the Illinois electoral system.  Fluke and unwelcome nominations happen all the time in these United States — i’s just that they’re disregarded relatively easily, even if they screw up one or the other party’s plans.  I can point to two examples in 2008 of state wide nominations for the US Senate.  Perennial hobby candidate Bob Kelleher won the Republican Senate nomination in Montana, meaning the fifteenth time was the charm after a bi-annual placing on the ballot as Democrat and Green.  To believe his selection was not a fluke is to believe Montana Republicans cottoned to his platform of socialized health care, a European parliamentary system, and banning Abortion.  In reality, his nomination was basically about the same as the 1986 Illinois Democratic nominations of two nutcase Larouchies for State Treasurer and Lieutenant Governor — the two state legislators vying for the nomination (and popping up on the NRSC website) had low name recognition, and to the extent that they were known had high disapprovals within a low impact election — Kelleher, meanwhile, had developed an unconcious name familiarity from his frequent appearance on the ballot (the “Smooth names” of 1986’s Illinois duo).  The Republicans weren’t investing anything into anyone’s win, and Kelleher never made an appearance on the NRSC website.
Meanwhile, in South Carolina a man who just attached himself to the letter “D” and was keen on Ron Paul was nominated the Democrats’ candidate for the US Senate.  This race was somewhat interesting to note, because he showed up in the polls within 8 and 9 points — he of a $300 warchest against Lindsey Graham’s entrenched millions.  He ended with a fairly predictable 15 percent margin, and I am one to believe no amount of money would have changed that result.

Meanwhile, Illinois has set up a system where a man who ekes through in a crowded field off has to run with the legitimate pol.  Perhaps this is divine retribution due to the corrupt nature of said “legitimate pol”s — the indicted  George Ryan, the indicted Governor Rod Blagojevich.

So, the reprise of 1986.

Former U.S. Sen. Adlai Stevenson — who formed a third party to run for governor in 1986 rather than share the same ticket as two disciples of Lyndon H. LaRouche — said Gov. Quinn faces the same political reality in dealing with running mate Scott Lee Cohen.

“It would be very difficult for Pat Quinn, in good conscience, to run for governor with this fellow tied to him as if they’re joined at the hip,” Stevenson told the Sun-Times today.

“One answer is to do what I did, namely to resign the nomination and run as an independent with a different lieutenant governor candidate,” he said. “Of course, they can try to talk [Cohen] out of it, but I’m skeptical as to whether that would work.”

Stevenson, who won the Democratic gubernatorial primary in 1986, formed the Solidarity Party rather than run with a LaRouche-backed lieutenant governor candidate, Mark Fairchild.

Stevenson wound up losing the general election to Republican Gov. James Thompson, who got 1.65 million votes to the 1.25 million that went to Stevenson and his Solidarity Party candidacy. Another 208,830 votes were cast for the Democratic governor’s slot that Stevenson vacated.

Of course, Adlai Stevenson III went on to lose that race.  (And really — isn’t there something about considering here “Adlai Stevenson III” somehow show the problem and indictment of how large numbers of someones might roll past the establishment picks and settle for the protest candidate they’ve never heard of?)  But, I guess Stevenson lost with integrity instead of losing with a cult.

Let’s now turn to Gerald Pechenuk’s alternative universe of events — and I would like to know on what planet does he spend his days?

Just think.  One departure was missed in parallel universes of how Larouche might have been brought to power, but for the exacting influence of Paul Simon and his British legions!  (But.  Wait.  Didn’t he have oh so much influence in the Clinton administration?)  OR… To rebut on the main thrust of his suggestion, turn to the Stevenson comment story.

Item the Second.

I may as well mention there that I was going to pull out David Duke’s two Republican nominations in Louisiana in the early 1990s as an example for Item the First, but upon consideration, I have to conclude that sadly those weren’t really “flukes”.  The electorate that selected Duke knew roughly what they were doing.

Meanwhile, the Tea Party Convention started with this throw-back to the days of Jim Crow.

Item the Third.  Digging through the comments relating to Henry Gasparian , the 70+ year old who slapped some Larouche members upset at their Hitler signs…

… I’m mostly unimpressed.  But it’s worth pointing at for Pechenuk, who seems to think Larouche is making strides with the youth (You might actually have to read some of Mr. Larouche and actually think, for a change, and then SEE what world leaders, including people in the US, SEE in Larouche, and SEE what the young people SEE in LaRouche, because your old SORE ASS smart aleck bullshit don’t count for a nickel, any more…..), the comments and poll at the Stranger.  Beyond that generic mention, I throw out this comment.

Basically, but not entirely.  I’ve seen that sentiment expressed in that way, have posted it before.  There’s slightly more, of course — wade through the anti-semitism ( “Hey!  Isn’t Jeffry Steinberg Jewish?”) — and I’d be remiss if I didn’t go ahead and link to  Dennis King linking to “earnest one” on his brother’s — Jonathan Tennenbaum – culpability in covering up on the death of Jeremiah Duggan.

Down a ways, I see the more partisan hackery and shallow mention of “inconvenient truth to the ‘Leftists’!  Larouche is a DEM!”  Bleh.  I suppose I should mention I sliced off the last sentence of the “marketing scam” comment to evade the stink bomb throwing.
[(Good luck to these people.  They're wasting their time.]
It appears from this LPAC release that the Larouche org is poised to make hay, for internal consumption, a rallying arouallying with the Republican Party to defeat “Obama Corruption”…. see the final paragraph, which quotes the RNC.

Item the Fourth.  The Seattle Times article comments include a couple of youtube videos — one of the SNL skit and the other a 1980 anti-environmentalist ad.    LINKS here  and here.  I high-light a few interesting and bemusing comments.  And you can play along at home with the game “Larouche Zombie, actively anti-Larouche, or amused passively anti-Larouche?)

plasticman1973  LOL, it’s funny and it sounds outrageous for those who don’t know the facts. I like the queen preparing the heroine though. Kissinger a homo? lol.

azezel2311  He does like to ramble. Scary thing is we seem to be on the same mindset. Minus the british empire. The brits could actually drive positive change if they wanted to. You just have to give them something new to go after. Something that they would have to build others up for in order to stand on them and get there…. Have we found that planet that is half gold and half diamond yet?

kappy0405 yup – kissinger and david rockefeller are just a few of the people who speak OPENLY about pop reduction. Leave it to SNL to ignore facts and cater to the Fox News/CNN mindset. :rolleyes:
Oh well, people ARE finally are waking up. (… And it only took 24 years…)

kanalje  this is amazing in a weird way. It’s like they are doing his bidding with this parody. It is not unlike the parody style of larouchies.
unityrover  Come for the Larouche, stay for the DANZA!!!

Trapster99 Well, I believed in all the lies said about Larouch, until I did a little research and found this great man’s mind.
He is a modern day Ben Franklin.
Want to solve most of America’s problems, right now?
Build 100 brand new, state of the art, high temprature Pebble Bed nuclear reactors (2 in each state).
That will employ 2 million people directly and indirectly. It will solve a host of environmental problems and it will make energy cheep across the land.
3 Mi Island was sabotaged.

terpis Hard to figure why a slick ad like that didn’t do the trick.

ITEM THE FIFTH.  Call me crazy, but I tend to think Obama will likely win a second term.  If you’re wondering about the qualifiers, it’s because I’m not setting such a prediction in stone.  Also his party will suffer significant losses in the mid-term elections.  That is the norm, the electorate that voted in the candidate falls back as somehow the magic pixie dust doesn’t alleviate all that ails them, and the electorate that voted against them steps forward and entrenches themselves.  There are things the in-party can do to shrink their losses, and things they can do to increase their losses — the Democrats appear to have gone the latter route.  I could go on and explain some things about the purely politikal plusses and minuses of Republican positioning, but this is losing focus.

Now, I’m reading through this sort of predictable and cyclical mess from LPAC and associates to… what? End the Obama Presidency somehow or other?  A few asides tossed in, and I thought I saw a floating of the “British may axe him” thing.

I caught ol Rush Limbaugh muttering about Hillary Clinton shifting up a run against this oh-so-wholly broken Obama Administration.  It’s an item mostly pulled out his arsh, but it’s a meme that I  see floated about every so often.   Being make-believe Clintonistas, I expect to see LPAC releases to that effect sooner or later, based on supposed insider information.

But it also occurs to me, recalling the 2008 nominating fight, fully behind Clinton was the Larouche organization.  The nominating battle fell to this stasis where every single state contest result was easily forecasted right through the end.  And it was there that LPAC commented on the results of Oregon and Wast Virginia, incongruently (go down the batch of Larouche PUMA material in the comments section here).

Despite the desperate assertions and wishful thinking of the pundits, as well as of the Obama campaign, that the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination is all but over, voters in both Kentucky and Oregon turned out to vote in large numbers on May 20, delivering another landslide victory for Hillary Clinton in Kentucky. In Oregon, although Barack Obama won (as expected), he did so with a far narrower gap between himself and Mrs. Clinton than had been projected.

Steam-rolling ahead, I guess, somewhere beyond Hillary’s talking points.  This made no sense — the totals were roughly what was expected.
This wraps back around to the 2010 mid-term elections, which Larouche Inc is gearing up with as part of a “mass strike”, because their post-election release won’t differ much whether the Democrats lose 2 Senate Seats and 2 House Seats, or lose 10 Senate Seats and 50 House seats.

 Incidentally, as I see Larouche drop a pile on Obama’s NASA mission plans — I guess in concert with the election campaign of Keesha Rogers– I note that Buzz Aldrin has his back.

Also, they’re scouting out for Gold Bugs here.

Kent Conrad, Democratic Senator of North Dakota: Deficit Hawk, Pork Hound.

See also, Kit Bond, Republican Senator of Missouri.

Or maybe Bond isn’t.  But there always exists that thing, the bi-partisan Deficit Hawk Pork Hound Caucus.

Bond’s hold was meant to apply pressure on the government to approve a proposed federal office building in downtown Kansas City, Mo. In the end, Bond voted for Johnson’s nomination.

As for the politics of “The Holds” — I suppose you can say that Bond had his rather paroachial and tedious reasons.  The obnoxious politics of the moment brings us one final beating of the hold and/or filibuster of a conventional appointee in the form of a 60 to 40 Labor nominee.

So Richard Shelby announces the new holding of everyone.  And he is a member of the bi-partisan deficit hawk pork hound cacus.  Yes, yes, it’s not too hard to look back to the Bush administration and see him bluster about the Hold ups of a bunch fewer Bush appointees.  Up and Down Vote, and all that.

The one thing I can say is that there is a satisfactory item of small d democracy in Harry Reid’s throw over to Obama to push up a mass of recess appointments.  As you may or may not recall, Bush recess appointed a few holds.  And therein it is worthwhile to point the name of one of the major figures the Democrats were holding up: John Bolton for the U.N. — whose history is one of not believing in the U.N.  Compare that with the Labor nominee just held up and I suppose we see the ideological fissures of the matter.
So it was there that the 51 to 49 Democratic Senate held very brief Christmas break Senate sessions presided over by Jim Webb, Freshman duty from nearest state.

That’s where this item of small d democracy comes in.  The Republican Party can’t break the recess appointees, because they are in the Senate minority.  Never mind the Village Voice headline after Brown’s victory and the ensuing free for all of news sources stating the Democrats lost the majority.  (This headline was only slightly tongue in cheek as a parody, as some news sites actually did say the majority was lost.)

Now, of all the prominent and quasi-prominent conservative talk show hosts and bloviators (whose job it is to fill three or four hours a day filling airtime to an audience nodding their head in agreement, and I guess a side audience of people shaking their head and gaping)…

… I despise Sean Hannity the most.  The phrase “The Whole of their Being” comes to mind with him.  I detect no stray thought deviating from the Conservative or GOP movement.  Say what you want about Beck, at least he’ll tap some Bircher source or other, and did not fully join the Scott Brown victory celebration.  And I can go down the list of the others and explain why they’re relatively (key word there) more original than Hannity.

There’s a particular “Wait.  What?” with this one.

During a panel discussion on the February 3 edition of Fox News’ Hannity, Bush White House communications director Nicolle Wallace asserted that Obama is “out of touch with what’s going on, on the streets of this country.” At the end of the segment, Hannity stated: “George Bush, who you worked for, did not play golf while this country was at war. … [H]e didn’t want the families of loved ones serving — or that may have lost a loved one — seeing him on a golf course. He seemed to be far more in touch.”

It’s as though the Liberals and Conservatives just passed off their batons for anti-administration memes on January 21 of last year, without a second thought on mixed messages.  By which I mean, Hannity would probably instinctively shake his head and dismiss a reference to Michael Moore airing the clip of Bush saying “Now watch this drive”, but that it’s been popularized by Michael Moore reaches to an increased point — if we are going to settle into one broad two sided partisan jabbing, I think everyone needs to have a grasp of the other side’s meme: this quotation from Hannity would be like the liberals not knowing the whole “reliance on teleprompter” thang.

Meanwhile, the word is coming out.  The Democrats are doing a disservice in “bashing Bush”, referencing the current perils of the Economy and the country at large and pointing back to the Bush Administration.  Funny thing about that, the economic recession in 2002 was always referred to by them as “the Clinton Recession”, and 9/11 was blamed right on Bush.  One’s rationalizing partisan politicking; the other is rational analysis.  Never the twain may mix.

I ran into this news story today, on GOP prospects and hopes that 2010 will be like 1994.  A very odd little phrase jumped out at me as a little false.

One wild card this year is the Tea Party movement, with its talk of “Sovereignty: The 10th Amendment” and “Put Ronnie on the Rock,” a reference to putting Ronald Reagan’s face on Mount Rushmore. Organizers say there are no plans of turning the movement into an actual political party and it will remain loosely organized.

“We have more to gain than lose by working with the Tea Party,” GOP Chairman Esser said.

“Put Ronnie on the Rock” is a tenant of the Tea Party movement?
I go to google news.  I look the phrase up to see this discussion of “Put Ronnie on the Rocks”.  I see this news article.  No other.

I go to google blogs.  I look the phrase up to see the discussion of “Put Ronnie on the Rocks”.  I see bump and kis.

I look up on google.  I see a bad personal website (not that there’s anything wrong with that) with vacation photos – and I am at a loss as to whether they are promoting sticking that Ronnie up on Mt Rushmore.  And once upon a time, someone chimed in on this message board with

MSNBC – Race & Ethnicity message board – How would everyone feel …

If I may say something about this interesting little cover story in this week’s Willamette Week?  It’s an interesting piece about local gadflys of causes meaningful and not meaningful.

This?

Individual insurrection in America dates back to the 18th century and Thomas Paine, and stretches to Howard Zinn, who died last week at 87. The author of the 1980 classic A People’s History of the United States, Zinn debunked the official narrative of U.S. history by popularizing the hidden truths about this nation’s founding.

In honor of Zinn, we’ve brought together vignettes about the Portland area’s most relentless citizen watchdogs: the men and women who set out each day to puncture the established version of the news by hounding everyone from the Portland Water Bureau to Multnomah County Animal Services.

This strikes me as a bit pretentious and someting of a reach.  Really, I think they just kind of siphoned Zinn at the last minute to a story in production.